intels which is better

[NYCboy]

which better the intel quad Q6600 or the intel core 2 duo extreme. please i need a straight answer!

 

[Capt_Scarlet]

which better the intel quad Q6600 or the intel core 2 duo extreme. please i need a straight answer!

I am not sure if there is a straight answer unfortunately as it does depend on what type of programs you will use with them. Both are powerful, there is no doubt about it but in slightly different ways.

Basically if you are using programs that aren't written to take advantage of more than one core then the extreme is better because it runs at a higher speed. The quad core runs at 2.4 mhz and is suited more to programs that can use more than one core and that is when it might be faster than the extreme.

John

 

[NYCboy]

I am not sure if there is a straight answer unfortunately as it does depend on what type of programs you will use with them. Both are powerful, there is no doubt about it but in slightly different ways.

Basically if you are using programs that aren't written to take advantage of more than one core then the extreme is better because it runs at a higher speed. The quad core runs at 2.4 mhz and is suited more to programs that can use more than one core and that is when it might be faster than the extreme.

John

so the intel quad Q6600 operates faster then the intel core 2 duo extreme?

 

[GP_38-2]

Try reading what he just said instead of quoting it.

To repeat Capt_Scarlet:
The Intel Core 2 Extreme is well suited for applications that DO NOT take advantage of DUAL CORE OR QUAD CORE (such as video games like Trainz)
The Intel Core 2 Quad is well suited for applications that DO take advantage of multiple cores (such as corporate applications such as 3D Studio MAX)

It all depends on what application you are trying to run.

 

[rjhowie1]

I don't think quad core would make a difference on Trainz?

 

[GP_38-2]

No it would not, nor will dual core make a difference.

 

[Capt_Scarlet]

No it would not, nor will dual core make a difference.

Well it would but only up to a point. For instance Trainz can have a core to itself while the OS and other services /apps can use a different core thus allowing more than one thing being done at the same time.

BUT for a application that can only use one core ( like Trainz ) the speed of one core is still the most important consideration ( besides the graphics card of course ) eg if you have a 8800gtx ultra then a Q6600 would be the limiting factor as that graphics card ( according to various tests ) requires a faster processor to get the best out of it.

John

The following quote is from http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-gpu-upgrade,1928.html

However, games are not 100% dependent on the graphics card; the Geforce 8 and 9 require a basic level of power, otherwise they are unable to exploit their 3D potential. The speed of the CPU should lie somewhere between 2600 and 3000 MHz; any lower, and the new graphics chips lose considerable performance.
There is no obvious advantage to quad cores over dual cores, at least according to the graphics-based benchmarks. In order for the Q6600 to compete with the dual core E6750, the same clocking rate is recommended. If you wish to combine an E2160 with a Geforce 8800 or Geforce 9, you will need to overclock. Without a clock rate of at least 2400 MHz, you will lose a considerable amount of graphics performance, because the card is not fully loaded.

 

[djpip]

Q6600

Hi,

I am using the Q6600 @ 2.4Ghz and overall it is very nice compared to an AMD Duron @1.8Ghz (My Old Spec) . Vista runs well as it assigns cores to individual programs but it must be said that very few programs support quad or even the dual core technology !

Overall I think Quad core will take over dual core like blu-ray did over HD-DVD so why limit yourself to a dual core machine ?

Spend the extra cash and go QUAD !

DJ PIP

 

[RooRocz]

Hi,

Overall I think Quad core will take over dual core like blu-ray did over HD-DVD so why limit yourself to a dual core machine ?

That is not quite how it will work... Within six or seven months I assure you that we will be seeing 8-core processors. By 2009 cell processors will probably be common. We may even be seeing QUANTUM PERSONAL COMPUTERS (oooh ahhh) with theoretically INFINITE PROCESSING POWER (oooh ahhh)sometime fairly soon (still 5-6 years off, though.)

I'd say go for the dual core if all you do is Trainz, (I sincerely hope you do more than just Trainz...) and the quad if you do other stuff. (any form of extreme multitasking, 3D modelling/rendering, Rigs of Rods, etc.)

 

[nismit]

It it not that trainz ain't multithreaded

Posting Deleted

 

[Capt_Scarlet]

Although the trainz sim in fact never seem to use more than 25% of a quad core, I have seen CMP use up to 50%.

The quad Q6600 is actually two dual E6600 back to back on a common FSB. The bandwidth between the CPU and the memory is shared. This may (in part) be the explanation for the disappointing lack of performance gain with programs like trainz, when going from mono to dual to quad core processors. That would indicate, that the memory bus is the bottleneck.

Sorry to tell you but Trainz cant and wont use more than one core of any processor because it has been written to use only one core. For Trainz to take advantage of a multi core set up it would have to be rewritten to do so and that is unlikely to happen as it is no easy task.

John

 

[llebrez]

We have to use what we have, I mean use hardware that matches the requirements. More would be a waste. Since Trainz uses only one core, you use one core as fast as possible. If the price of one core is almost equal to two, use it for the benefit that maybe some background program may run at the same time (not recommended). I am experimenting now with an E8400 CPU. It runs at 3Ghz (The 8500 goes at 3.1 and costs a lot more!), with a little OC it should perform quite well. Using a video card PCE 2.0 also improves matters decently. Use XP, and 2 Gb RAM. That is about all we can do economically today.